Is noone else gonna point out the absurdity that if the guy had been 1 year older, legally speaking there would’ve been nothing wrong?
The problem here is the grooming (which I think it’s worth noting that adults can be victims of as well), the abuse of power dynamics, and particularly in this case the exploitation of another’s inexperience for personal gratification.
But the article instead focuses on how the kid was “affected” by the teacher’s “criminal actions”, but then essentially just describes the kinds of consequences caused by the social stigma of student-teacher relationships. But this also happens in university, where it also carries negative social consequences, but not legal ones.
My point is simply that the legal system is a flimsy caricature of morality/ethics, and in articles like these it really shows.
Is noone else gonna point out the absurdity that if the guy had been 1 year older, legally speaking there would’ve been nothing wrong?
The problem here is the grooming (which I think it’s worth noting that adults can be victims of as well), the abuse of power dynamics, and particularly in this case the exploitation of another’s inexperience for personal gratification.
But the article instead focuses on how the kid was “affected” by the teacher’s “criminal actions”, but then essentially just describes the kinds of consequences caused by the social stigma of student-teacher relationships. But this also happens in university, where it also carries negative social consequences, but not legal ones.
My point is simply that the legal system is a flimsy caricature of morality/ethics, and in articles like these it really shows.